Works, Book 4 · Letter 84 – Letter 86
EPISTLE LXXXIV.
Mr. Mede's Letter to Mr. Hartlib, expressing his Opinion touching Mr. Streso's Book, and his distinguishing of Three sorts of Fundamentals.
Mr. Hartlib,
I Read over your Streso with some attention, and find many learned and considerable passages and discourses therein: But for my Animadversions which you look for, it were against my Genius; for I am one that had rather give my opinion by much, (though the world hath taught me even there to be somewhat nice,) than censure another man's. But in general, I conceive his way to be somewhat ambiguous and intricate, more than needs.
He distinguisheth Three sorts of Fundamentals. One he calls Fundamentum ipsum: The other two he measures by their relation to it, either à parte antè, and such he terms Sub-fundamentales; or à parte Pòst, which may be called Super-fundamentales. The one, of such Truths quae substernuntur Fundamento; the other, such as follow by immediate consequence from the same. This I take to be the Sum of his opinion.
Now for that which is his Fundamentum ipsum or foreign, I make no doubt but the acknowledgment of the truth thereof is Fundamental ad Salutem: So I believe also are his Ante or Sub-fundamentals; though the most of them not proper to Christianity, but common to it with Iudaism. For the Church of the Gospel is built or graffed upon the Iewish, the common Foundation remaining the same in both. But as for the third sort of Fundamentals, or Super-fundamentals, which he makes such as are by immediate or necessary consequence deducible from the Fundamentum Salutis; I make some question whether all such are necessaria cognitu & creditu ad Salutem simply. First, because the necessity of such consequence may not be apprehended by all who hold the Fundamentum. Secondly, because I am not yet perswaded, that to deny or be ignorant of a Truth which is merely Speculative (such as some of these Consequences may be) is damnable; but only of such Truths, the knowledge and acknowledgment whereof hath necessary connexion with some practical requisite unto Salvation; I mean, whereon depends necessarily the acquiring of some Act necessary, or the avoiding some Act repugnant to Salvation.
So that still, it seems to me, the readiest and easiest way for resolution in this matter is, To enquire and examine what those Acts are wherein consists our Spiritual life, or that Union and Fellowship which we have with the Father and his Son our Mediator Iesus Christ. That which is necessarium cognitu & creditu unto these is Fundamental ad Salutem, i.e. cujus agnitioni Salus tanquam Fundamento innititur: That which is not so, is not Fundamental ad Salutem. For example, He that comes unto God (saith S. Paul) must believe that God is: So likewise, He that comes unto Christ, or unto the Father by him, (as every one must do that will be saved) must believe that Christ is, and that he is constituted the Mediator between God and us. He that comes unto and relies upon Christ for remission of sin, must believe that Christ suffered, and was offered a Sacrifice for the sins of men, and thereby purchased that power to confer remission unto all that should repent and believe in his Name. He that bids a true farewel to sin, and savingly buckles to the works of a new life, must believe there is a life to come, and a Day wherein God by the Man he hath ordained shall judge both the quick and dead, and give unto every one according to his works; according to that of S. Paul, Acts 24. 15, 16. I have hope towards God; that there shall be a Resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust. *So should foreign be rendred: not In hoc, nor In hac re, as the Valg. and Erasmus; nor Interea, with Beza; but, with the Syriack and Arabick, Propterea. H…bra…smus est, ubi foreign in sape val… propter.[For this cause] do I exercise my self to have always a conscience void of offence toward God and toward men. According to these examples you may examine more.
The difference between Mr. Streso's way and mine is this: He measures his Fundamentals by their relation to one Fundamentum; I measure all by the relation they have to Eternal life, in regard of those Acts and Dispositions whereby we are capable thereof.
Take this Similitude; In a Creature indued with animal life are many Members or Organs, whereof though none can be wanting, hurt or wounded, without some deformity, defect or detriment of the whole; yet all are not essential unto the Life of the Body, but such only from whence those Faculties and Functions flow whereon Life necessarily depends; such as are Respiratio, Nutritio, Gustus, Tactus, Pulsus, Somnus, and the like: Therefore the Organs whereon these depend can neither be wanting, nor notoriously hurt or wounded, but the Body presently dieth. Without Legs, Arms, Tongue, Eyes, Ears, Nose, a man may live, though a most pitiful, ugly and loathsome spectacle, and more fit for the Spittle than the publick society of men: But without Head, Heart, Lungs, Stomach, and the like, he cannot; namely because these Members, and the sound and good temper of them in some degree, are necessary to those Faculties and Functions which are requisite unto Life. Apply this, and improve it by your Meditation. Vale.
Yours, Ios. Mede. February 27.
EPISTLE LXXXV.
Mr. Mede's Letter to Mr. Hartlib, touching the Acta Lipsiaca, as also touching a Confession of Faith and the way of determining Fundamentals, that it should be short, easie and evident.
Worthy Sir,
I Have received the Acta Lipsiaca, but if I could have given you notice in time, I would have saved you that labour, and borrowed of Dr. W. for he had promised to lend me his. When I had read it over, Lord! me thought, what little differences are these to break communion for? viz. for one or two Speculative Subtilties, for some Logical or Metaphysical Notion. So I believe much of these disputes (when the wisest and moderatest of both sides have expounded themselves) is (I will not say mere foreign, but) foreign.—For your Extracts, I read them presently, and laid them by; and to confess the truth, some business following presently took me so much up, that I had almost forgot I had them, till your admonition put me now in mind of them.
That George Francis his way Degradibus necessitatis dogmatum Christianorum, quibus Fidei, Spei & Charitatis officia reguntur, methinks by the Title should come somewhat near that fansie. 'Tis true that he says, Some men have such an unhappiness of Logick, that by an affected following their methods and Technological artifices they make things more obscure and intricate, which in the true use of Logick should be made more easie and perspicuous.
I have not yet attentively read Mr. Dury's Consultation: which I will do, and then send it back: For mens minds here are so remote from thoughts of this nature, that it is to little purpose to communicate it to many. The way to determine Fundamental Articles must be made very short, easie and evident; or it will breed as many Controversies as are about the Points themselves in question. I can gather that by what I sometimes meet with. It is not fit that a Confession which concerns all that will be saved to know and remember should be any long or tedious Discourse. The Ten Commandments given by God are an Epitome faciendorum; The Lord's Prayer is Summa or Epitome petendorum: According to which Pattern the Confession we seek for should be but Summa credendorum.
Thus with my prayers and best affection, I rest
Christ's Coll. Iuly 24. Your assured Friend, Ios. Mede.
EPISTLE LXXXVI.
Mr. Mede's Letter to Mr. Hartlib touching the defining of Fundamental Articles.
Mr. Hartlib,
I Have received yours. It seems strange to me that men should hold, that those who erre in Fundamentals cannot be saved, and yet maintain it scarce possible to set down the Ratio of a Fundamental Article, or any foreign whereby to know them.
What though Fundamentum & Fundamentalia be Metaphorical terms? yet may they soon be turned into proper ones, namely, Articuli cognitu & creditu necessarii ad Salutem. Here is no Metaphor: Whether therefore may there any Ratio or foreign be given to discern these?
I believe not that Canon of the Council of Ephesus intended to prescribe to any other Council of like Authority, not to explicate or improve the Creed of Nice, as they did that of the Apostles; but that no private Bishop should compose any other Formula Fidei, to be a Rule and Symbolum of Communion, than that of Nice.
Thus with my Prayers and best affection, I remain
Christ's Colledge ult. Iuly 1637. Your assured Friend, Ioseph Mede.